Need help with cracking those EICR codes? The technical team at NAPIT, with the help of the 18th Edition Codebreakers publication, answer your latest coding queries. Click on the photos for a closer look!
DOMINIC HARRISON: I THOUGHT YOU MIGHT APPRECIATE THIS CONSUMER UNIT THAT HAS BEEN HASTILY RELOCATED JUST ABOVE A MAINS WATER PIPE!
At first glance, the proximity of the CU to the water service may seem either too close or against a Regulation. In truth, there are no such Regulations in BS 7671 for water services; although gas is mentioned, no defining distances are given. Any minimum distances between electrical switchgear, or similar, and gas services are given in: ‘BS 6891:2015 Specification for the installation and maintenance of low pressure gas installations of up to 35 mm (R1 ¼) on premises.’
Segregation distances between gas and electrical intakes are given as 150 mm. As the CU is not the electrical service head, and water is not covered in BS 6891, there isn’t actually an infringement. Further to this, BS 6891 states minimum segregation between electrical switchgear, or similar, and gas pipework as being 25 mm. Even if the pipework in the photo were to be gas, they wouldn’t infringe BS 6891 as the distance is more than 25 mm and probably more than 150 mm, if we scale the drawing using a standard breeze block width of 440 mm, allowing 10 mm for a mortar joint, with what appears to be half a block between the pipework and the CU. So, there is actually no code or observation for the proximity of equipment in this case.
That said, there are still issues that are more likely to cause injury in the photo. There are accessible live conductors where the connections are exposed, single insulation not taken into an enclosure, cables and terminations not adequately supported, and what appears to be some kind of shared circuit lines and neutrals, which we cannot comment on without further information. Another issue is that the spare way in the CU is blanked off with tape, which is starting to degrade and fail, giving potential access to live parts. Tape is not seen as an acceptable method to blank-off spare ways, especially when compounded by the tape starting to fall apart. Ironically, I think they may have re-used the DNO’s cut-out warning seal tape that states “removing this seal is illegal”!
Order your copy of NAPIT Codebreakers by clicking here
